Citation Nr: 0413219
Decision Date: 05/21/04 Archive Date: 05/28/04
DOCKET NO. 02-13 369 ) DATE
)
)
On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania
THE ISSUE
Entitlement to service connection for a nervous disability.
REPRESENTATION
Appellant represented by: The American Legion
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
A. Hinton, Counsel
INTRODUCTION
The veteran served on active duty from February 1978 to
February 1981. He had unverified reserve duty from 1987 to
1991, with unverified activation to federal active duty from
1987 to 1991.
This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals
(Board) on appeal from rating decisions of the Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office in Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania (RO), which denied the benefit sought on appeal.
In a January 2000 rating decision, the RO denied a claim for
service connection for a nervous disorder. The veteran filed
a notice of disagreement as to that decision in May 2000.
Subsequently in July 2001, the RO notified the veteran of the
Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000 (VCAA). 38 U.S.C.A.
§§ 5102, 5103, 5103A, 5107 (West Supp. 2002). Subsequently
in a December 2001 decision, the RO denied service connection
for a nervous disorder. The veteran filed a notice of
disagreement as to that decision. After receiving a
statement of the case in August 2002, the veteran perfected
his appeal by filing a substantive appeal in August 2002.
REMAND
The Board has reviewed the claims file with respect to the
claim for service connection for a nervous disorder, and
determined that prior to adjudicating the veteran's claim,
further development is necessary.
In July 2002, the veteran submitted two VA Forms 21-4142,
Authorization and Consent to Release Information to the
Department of Veterans Affairs. These forms were signed by
the veteran but he did not complete information identifying
sources of information relevant to treatment received or
conditions. On the front copy of that form, there is a
notation of "blank 4142s" suggesting that the RO did not
have information needed to seek indicated records. However,
in a statement from the veteran accompanying the VA Forms 21-
4142, he informed the RO of three treatment providers who
have provided pertinent treatment in 1997.
In that statement, the veteran stated that proof of his
condition could be obtained from the following sources: (1)
Medical Consultants review of psychiatric review technique
form, dated October 15, 1997, by Charles M. Tucker, Ph.D.;
(2) Psychiatric Review Technique, dated October 18, 1997, by
Raymond F. Dalton, Jr., Ph.D.; (3) medical records from
Latrobe Area Hospital, dated from June 8, 1997 to July 4,
1997.
Review of the claims file indicates that the RO has not
sought these records. Prior to the Board's adjudication of
the veteran's claim, the RO should obtain these records.
Accordingly, the Board finds that additional development is
required prior to resolution of this claim. See 38 U.S.C.A.
§ 5103A (West 2002). The appellant should be given the
opportunity to submit additional evidence and argument. In
this regard, the VA must ensure that it fulfilled its duty to
notify the appellant of the evidence necessary to
substantiate his claim. See 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103 (West 2002).
The VA should assist the appellant in these matters prior to
the Board's review. See also Bernard v. Brown, 4 Vet. App.
384, 394 (1993).
In view of the above, the case is remanded to the RO via the
Appeals Management Center in Washington DC for the following:
1. The RO must review the claims file
and ensure that all obligations under the
Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000
(VCAA) have been satisfied. 38 U.S.C.A.
§§ 5102, 5103, and 5103A (West 2002);
38 C.F.R. § 3.159(b). See also
Quartuccio v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 183
(2002).
2. The RO should obtain copies of any VA
or private medical records pertaining to
treatment the appellant received for a
nervous disorder, covering the period
since discharge from active service in
February 1981, to the present, which have
not been previously submitted. The RO
should also specifically request private
medical records from the following
sources including the cited records: (1)
Medical Consultants review of psychiatric
review technique form, dated October 15,
1997, by Charles M. Tucker, Ph.D.; (2)
Psychiatric Review Technique, dated
October 18, 1997, by Raymond F. Dalton,
Jr., Ph.D.; (3) medical records from
Latrobe Area Hospital, dated from June 8,
1997 to July 4, 1997.
3. After the development requested above
has been completed to the extent
possible, and any other development
deemed appropriate by the RO, the RO
should again review the record, and
readjudicate the claim on appeal. If a
benefit sought on appeal remains denied,
the veteran and representative should be
furnished a supplemental statement of the
case (SSOC), to include all pertinent law
and regulations, and given the
opportunity to respond thereto. The
supplemental statement of the case must
contain notice of all relevant actions
taken on the claim for benefits since the
August 2002 SSOC, to include a summary of
the evidence and applicable law and
regulations considered pertinent to the
issue currently on appeal. Thereafter,
the case should be returned to the Board
for further appellate consideration.
The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence
and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded
to the regional office. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App.
369 (1999).
This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment by the RO.
The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the
Board of Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of
Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or
other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious
manner. See The Veterans
Benefits Act of 2003, Pub. L. No. 108-183, § 707(a), (b), 117
Stat. 2651 (2003) (to be codified at 38 U.S.C. §§ 5109B,
7112).
_________________________________________________
J. E. Day
Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals
Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the
Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States
Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. This remand is in the
nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a
decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal.
38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (2003).